California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Enloe, C071987 (Cal. App. 2015):
arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse." Defendant argues that CALCRIM No. 935, standing alone, says nothing to require the jury to find that he touched the breasts of the complaining witnesses with the wrongful intent. However, the use of the phrase "for the purpose of" typically denotes a specific intent crime. (People v. Atkins (2001) 25 Cal.4th 76, 86.) We conclude there is no reasonable likelihood a juror would fail to understand that touching breasts "for the purpose" of sexual arousal, sexual gratification, or sexual abuse was a specific and wrongful intent and that the instruction required the union of act and intent.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.